Stop attending Mass. Stop giving Holy Mother Church your money. Pull your kids from parochial school. For Washington's Catholic children: NEVER be alone with a priest or any other clergy. If they touch you in a way you don't like, tell your parents. ESPECIALLY when that priest/clergyman tells you "Don't say anything to anyone. This is our little secret." If they threaten you with hell, tell them "You'll be the one going there, not me."
If forgiving sins is more important than condemning crimes, why the vaticon needs a criminal code ?
By the way, you will love this
"On March 29, 2019, one month after a historic Vatican sex abuse summit was held,[8] Pope Francis issued a new Vatican City law REQUIRING VATICAN CITY OFFICIALS, including those in the Roman Curia,[8] and foreign nuncios affiliated with the Vatican government, TO EPORT SEX ABUSE. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to 5,000 euros (about $5,600) or, in the case of a Vatican gendarme, up to six months in prison.[9] The statute of limitations was also increased from 4 years to 20 years and any Vatican employee found guilty will be dismissed on a mandatory basis.[10] On May 9, 2019, a new law was issued to male and female church workers not just in the Vatican, but throughout the world to disclose any report of sex abuse.[11][12][13]
"On May 9, 2019, a new law was issued to male and female church workers not just in the Vatican, but throughout the world to disclose any report of sex abuse."
This ignores the possibility the nation that is the Vatican City has other laws that preempt reporting. The nation's religious laws would likely be more controlling given the theocratic nature of it. It does make all Catholic priests mandatory reporters - to a certain point. But there are jurisdictional questions as well limiting enforceability. The pronouncement was limited to the Vatican City because the Pope has no LEGAL authority beyond that. Until the Vatican's courts weigh in on this question all else is speculative.
𝗢𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝟮𝟵, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟵, one month after a historic Vatican sex abuse summit was held,[8] Pope Francis issued 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝘀, 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗮,[𝟴] 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗻𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗼𝘀 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝘅 𝗮𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗲. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to 5,000 euros (about $5,600) or, in the case of a Vatican gendarme, up to six months in prison.[9] The statute of limitations was also increased from 4 years to 20 years and any Vatican employee found guilty will be dismissed on a mandatory basis.[10] 𝗢𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟵, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟵, 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘀𝗲𝘅 𝗮𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗲.
The only question I have at this point is: are priests "church workers?" The answer to that SHOULD be intuitively obvious. If Frankie wanted to distinguish priests from church workers, he should have done so specifically with the law. Everything I see here tells me that 𝗛𝗘 𝗗𝗜𝗗 𝗡𝗢𝗧.
It might have something to do with the fact that the pope's civil authority only extends as far as the boundaries of Vatican City and that he can't make laws for other countries.
vaticon civil workers and priests have the double nationality and/or diplomatic status. The poop civil authority applies to any vaticon citizen, wherever they are in the world. That makes the transfer of pedophile priests from country to country easier.
The top establishment of the American Catholic Church (the cardinals and archbishops) are notoriously more conservative than Catholics thruout the rest of the world. Not that anybody's gonna mistake any of THEM for critical-thinking liberals, either, but they've largely outgrown their heritage of crusaderism.
Once again we are treated to a glaring example of the disconnect between religion and morality. The Catholic Church cannot demonstrate the truth of anything they claim to believe, and yet they put those beliefs ahead of basic human decency. I don't know how we are ever going to fully overcome that Medieval mind-set. For now, all people can do is vote with their feet and put the church in their rear view mirrors.
Has it escaped the attention of the DoJ that their President is a serial sexual predator? That he's been accused of sexual harassment by 40 different women? That he was found liable for sexual assault? That he openly hit on a woman on live TV just the other day?
This is what happens when a man decides he is above the law. "I make the rules. I don't have to follow them." Just like James I (King James of ye olde bible fame, who also happened to be a flamer that bestowed gifts and positions of power on his boyfriends).
Hit on. During an event at the WH, he described a female reporter as beautiful, despite being told beforehand that he should restrain himself from making such remarks.
(I know. Trump restrain himself? Talk about Mission: Impossible)
"priests cannot comply with this law if the knowledge of abuse is obtained during the Sacrament of Reconciliation"
Priests had no qualm in the past to use the sacrament of reconciliation to blackmail sovereigns and nobles.
The secret of the identity of the sinner is another lie. For centuries, confession booths didn't exist or were a rarity.
And once again, in cannon law, priests are the ones deciding of the penance, they have the possibility to refuse the last step, absolution. They just don't care, especially if the rapist/abuser is another priest.
It's more than time for the US to leave the 19th century and recognize that the Constitutional Rights applies to children too.
"The secret of the identity of the sinner is another lie."
There is no secret. If I could easily identify the priest at the other side of the screen, he could do the same with me. Or he could have seen me through the curtains, waiting for my turn or afterwards, praying my two lord's prayers and three hail mary's.
France tried with barbarin. He was released on his first or second appeal (possible when the Cour de Cassation cancel the first judgement, this cancellation is followed by a retrial).
Sins? Fine. The Catholic Church can forgive sins all it wants. That says NOTHING about CRIMES, not against property and NOT AGAINST PEOPLE. And the last I looked, sexual assault, particularly against children, IS A CRIME. [sigh] This crap has gone on for entirely too long, and that the Trump administration has stuck their nose into this only tells me that it's one more thing they want to SCREW UP.
When the Catholic Bishop takes the stand in the trial, and the Christian Fucking Privilege crowd will insist on the lawsuit going to trial, he needs to be asked these pointed questions:
Is forgiving a sin the same thing as pardoning a crime? Does forgiving that sin, while releasing the sinner from eternal punishment in Hell, also release the criminal from the earthly penalty from that crime? If so, you could very quickly relieve prison overcrowding by having a bunch of priests go to the prisons and hear confessions at the gate as the line of prisoners waits to walk out.
Unless the answer to that question is an unmodified "NO," the US and indeed the world gets opened up to scofflaws of all stripes, who can commit any crime, run to their priest for forgiveness, then go right back at it.
"The Catholic Church insisted their religious beliefs—which the rest of us are under no obligation to follow—should override the communal need to protect children."
In theory, confession is supposed to be anonymous (although every Catholic kid who went to confession were aware that the priests knew who was on the other side of the screen), so it is also in theory that if someone confesses somthing that is a civil crime to a priest (be it sexual abuse, murder, theft or whatever) that a priest could report the act but not necessarily the identity of the person who confessed. Any parishoners who are feeling the full brunt of Catholic guilt (which is a really heavy burden) knows that Father Friendly is going to give them the stink eye the next time he sees them, so instead of going to Saint Myparish, they are going to drive across town to the church of Saint Egregious to confess the really juicy sins. For the Catholic church, this is a big nothingburger, but it's a way for the bishops to pretend this is still the middle ages when they could order the civil authorities around with impunity. People in the higher ranks of the church's heirocracy remember when they had that power and a lot of them regret that it ever slipped out of their clutches.
Priest: We all have these kinds of feeling from time to time. You know, there was a man on our church council a few years ago. A decent enough fellow but a bit abrasive. Oblivious to anyone else's feelings. I wanted to get him out of my hair. I used to fantasize about him converting to Judaism. One day, I said, "Frank, I think..."
I've seen too many TV-dramatized instances of "anonymous" confessions ["Hello, Fred." "Hello, Father Aloysius. Bless me father..."] to ever believe that anonymity tripe.
When I was in middle school, I once saw a confession scene in a soap opera, where the confessional was actually a room with a couple of chairs and I think a small table (?). A priest sat in one chair, and people came in, sat down across from the good father and confessed their sins face-to-face. I remember that scene because the thought of being required to tell a grownup everything bad I had done that week freaked the daylights out of me.
Then later on, I saw TV shows and movies using the "anonymous" confession booth, so I eventually figured the soap opera writers weren't catholic and got it wrong.
They started the open face-to-face option when I was in elementary school. I never took it; I could at least pretend the priest didn't recognize my voice if I couldn't see his face.
That's why you go to a church across town or in the far 'burbs to confess the most damaging ones. On the other hand, since when is TV an accurate portrayal of life? In the confessional, the anonymity is supposed to be de jure even if not de facto.
However, even an informal (face-to-face) conversation involving a priest can invoke the seal of confession by using the magic words "…bless me father for I have sinned…”
Anyone seeking absolution of sin through the conduit of a mediator that has a monopoly on forgiveness through some religious conceit meanwhile excluding the agrieved is NOT seeking absolution, they are seeking to offload guilt while remaining whole. C'est-à-dire, it's not forgiveness, it's a dodge. To find true absolution, confess openly, confess to your god, confess to the law, confess to your victim. But don't try to hide behind anything.
If the church cannot get its holy head around this, the fundamental idea of confession and absolution was meaningless Day One.
"We're asking the court to step in and stop the state from turning a sanctuary for the soul into a tool of surveillance."
The soul that continues to choose evil does not deserve sanctuary unless they are ready to make a full confession to the proper authorities and face the penalty of their conduct.
Is a person who intends to not stop his active abuse of children truly repentant? No. Of course not. Why is this even a question? Someone who does not intend to surrender himself to the proper authorities to end their active harm to another is not in a proper place to receive forgiveness. What they want, and what the Church seems to want to provide them, is spiritual solace as they continue hurting innocent people.
If confession was so sacrosanct, we wouldn’t have centuries of priests using secrets from confession to blackmail political leaders. When it is used to promote the church’s interests it’s fine, but if it’s for protecting children or the vulnerable, it’s a sacrament.
Always the church, all the churches, plead persecution when they are expected to be held to the same standards as everyone else. When they lose a privilege they never should have had in the first place.
It is also clear that Catholicism has nothing to do with morality since they fight like dogs to avoid the right thing to do.
There is so much wrong with this whole argument, although not with hemant’s reporting of it.
As far as I know, there is nothing in the Bible about confession. There are a number of passages which indicate a proper course of action in cases of abuse. Something about millstones and causing a child to stumble. Something about no greater love than a man should lay down his life for his friends. Something about God so loving the world that he died for everyone’s sins.
One has to wonder exactly how many Catholics are confessing to their priests about their child molestation activities. But this inadvertently reveals the real problem: reporting abuse means that priest will be reporting on their fellow priests, not actively working to cover up the abuse, as has been done for centuries.
To the Catholic parents of my state...
Stop attending Mass. Stop giving Holy Mother Church your money. Pull your kids from parochial school. For Washington's Catholic children: NEVER be alone with a priest or any other clergy. If they touch you in a way you don't like, tell your parents. ESPECIALLY when that priest/clergyman tells you "Don't say anything to anyone. This is our little secret." If they threaten you with hell, tell them "You'll be the one going there, not me."
If forgiving sins is more important than condemning crimes, why the vaticon needs a criminal code ?
By the way, you will love this
"On March 29, 2019, one month after a historic Vatican sex abuse summit was held,[8] Pope Francis issued a new Vatican City law REQUIRING VATICAN CITY OFFICIALS, including those in the Roman Curia,[8] and foreign nuncios affiliated with the Vatican government, TO EPORT SEX ABUSE. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to 5,000 euros (about $5,600) or, in the case of a Vatican gendarme, up to six months in prison.[9] The statute of limitations was also increased from 4 years to 20 years and any Vatican employee found guilty will be dismissed on a mandatory basis.[10] On May 9, 2019, a new law was issued to male and female church workers not just in the Vatican, but throughout the world to disclose any report of sex abuse.[11][12][13]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Vatican_City
Don't you all like the shitty smell of hypocrisy ?
I can't help but notice that he LIMITED that pronouncement to Vatican City. One has to ask WHY.
From the end of my comment
"On May 9, 2019, a new law was issued to male and female church workers not just in the Vatican, but throughout the world to disclose any report of sex abuse."
That ties it, then. With that statement, Frankie turned ALL PRIESTS into MANDATORY REPORTERS.
How about THEM apples?
Funny how information spreads when it's not controlled by one source.
Yeah ... funny thing, that.
This ignores the possibility the nation that is the Vatican City has other laws that preempt reporting. The nation's religious laws would likely be more controlling given the theocratic nature of it. It does make all Catholic priests mandatory reporters - to a certain point. But there are jurisdictional questions as well limiting enforceability. The pronouncement was limited to the Vatican City because the Pope has no LEGAL authority beyond that. Until the Vatican's courts weigh in on this question all else is speculative.
Let's look at that Wikipedia entry again:
𝗢𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝟮𝟵, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟵, one month after a historic Vatican sex abuse summit was held,[8] Pope Francis issued 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝘀, 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗮,[𝟴] 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗻𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗼𝘀 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝘅 𝗮𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗲. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to 5,000 euros (about $5,600) or, in the case of a Vatican gendarme, up to six months in prison.[9] The statute of limitations was also increased from 4 years to 20 years and any Vatican employee found guilty will be dismissed on a mandatory basis.[10] 𝗢𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟵, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟵, 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘀𝗲𝘅 𝗮𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗲.
The only question I have at this point is: are priests "church workers?" The answer to that SHOULD be intuitively obvious. If Frankie wanted to distinguish priests from church workers, he should have done so specifically with the law. Everything I see here tells me that 𝗛𝗘 𝗗𝗜𝗗 𝗡𝗢𝗧.
It might have something to do with the fact that the pope's civil authority only extends as far as the boundaries of Vatican City and that he can't make laws for other countries.
vaticon civil workers and priests have the double nationality and/or diplomatic status. The poop civil authority applies to any vaticon citizen, wherever they are in the world. That makes the transfer of pedophile priests from country to country easier.
The top establishment of the American Catholic Church (the cardinals and archbishops) are notoriously more conservative than Catholics thruout the rest of the world. Not that anybody's gonna mistake any of THEM for critical-thinking liberals, either, but they've largely outgrown their heritage of crusaderism.
I am sure your governor would love to know about this.
Once again we are treated to a glaring example of the disconnect between religion and morality. The Catholic Church cannot demonstrate the truth of anything they claim to believe, and yet they put those beliefs ahead of basic human decency. I don't know how we are ever going to fully overcome that Medieval mind-set. For now, all people can do is vote with their feet and put the church in their rear view mirrors.
This is so on point. It’s fantasy overruling harsh reality. The way the church has always been and will always be.
𝐷𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑑 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑚𝑝’𝑠 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐽𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑡’𝑠 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠.
Not surprising, given that Trump is an adjudicated sexual predator.
When Shitler is involved, the choices couldn’t be more clear. Do the opposite of what he wants.
Has it escaped the attention of the DoJ that their President is a serial sexual predator? That he's been accused of sexual harassment by 40 different women? That he was found liable for sexual assault? That he openly hit on a woman on live TV just the other day?
They know. They do not care.
That's why he doesn't bother trying to hide it. They don't care and he knows they don't care. At this point the DoJ is among the enablers
Florida apologizes for Pam Blondie.
They need to do a damned sight more than just apologize!
I find your apology insufficient.
Hypocrites all.
This is what happens when a man decides he is above the law. "I make the rules. I don't have to follow them." Just like James I (King James of ye olde bible fame, who also happened to be a flamer that bestowed gifts and positions of power on his boyfriends).
He struck someone, on purpose? I avoid any articles about his actions, so, I haven’t heard.
Hit on. During an event at the WH, he described a female reporter as beautiful, despite being told beforehand that he should restrain himself from making such remarks.
(I know. Trump restrain himself? Talk about Mission: Impossible)
Oh! Well, just more of the same then. Of course, he regularly hammers people with his noxious gases, so knocking a gal down isn’t a “new thing.”
"priests cannot comply with this law if the knowledge of abuse is obtained during the Sacrament of Reconciliation"
Priests had no qualm in the past to use the sacrament of reconciliation to blackmail sovereigns and nobles.
The secret of the identity of the sinner is another lie. For centuries, confession booths didn't exist or were a rarity.
And once again, in cannon law, priests are the ones deciding of the penance, they have the possibility to refuse the last step, absolution. They just don't care, especially if the rapist/abuser is another priest.
It's more than time for the US to leave the 19th century and recognize that the Constitutional Rights applies to children too.
"The secret of the identity of the sinner is another lie."
There is no secret. If I could easily identify the priest at the other side of the screen, he could do the same with me. Or he could have seen me through the curtains, waiting for my turn or afterwards, praying my two lord's prayers and three hail mary's.
"𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝐶ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠—𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒖𝒔 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒏𝒐 𝒐𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒕𝒐 𝒇𝒐𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒘—𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑛."
That "no obligation" part is the next thing they want to change.
The Catholic Church is placing itself above the law. That simple.
The Catholic Church wants to return to a time when they 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 the law.
Not the Fantasy Laws!
If a priest refuses to break the seal of confession for a child raper, can he be charged as an accomplice after the fact?
I should damned well hope so! Sadly, secular law enforcement continues to act as though anyone of the cloth is beyond reproach.
And as long as that's the case, the shit show will continue.
"If they don’t, the subsequent misdemeanor charge could land them a year-long prison sentence on top of a $5,000 fine."
Slapped on the wrist.
Good question!
France tried with barbarin. He was released on his first or second appeal (possible when the Cour de Cassation cancel the first judgement, this cancellation is followed by a retrial).
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑔𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑆𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑃𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑘𝑒𝑦𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑑𝑜𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑛, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑐𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡’𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 “𝑏𝑖𝑛𝑑” 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑜 “𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑠𝑒”—𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑑𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑠.
Sins? Fine. The Catholic Church can forgive sins all it wants. That says NOTHING about CRIMES, not against property and NOT AGAINST PEOPLE. And the last I looked, sexual assault, particularly against children, IS A CRIME. [sigh] This crap has gone on for entirely too long, and that the Trump administration has stuck their nose into this only tells me that it's one more thing they want to SCREW UP.
This has gone beyond the pale.
When the Catholic Bishop takes the stand in the trial, and the Christian Fucking Privilege crowd will insist on the lawsuit going to trial, he needs to be asked these pointed questions:
Is forgiving a sin the same thing as pardoning a crime? Does forgiving that sin, while releasing the sinner from eternal punishment in Hell, also release the criminal from the earthly penalty from that crime? If so, you could very quickly relieve prison overcrowding by having a bunch of priests go to the prisons and hear confessions at the gate as the line of prisoners waits to walk out.
𝐼𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒?
Unless the answer to that question is an unmodified "NO," the US and indeed the world gets opened up to scofflaws of all stripes, who can commit any crime, run to their priest for forgiveness, then go right back at it.
Insanity.
> "When Jesus Christ gave Saint Peter the keys to the kingdom of Heaven,..."
Pictures, or it didn't happen.
😂
"The Catholic Church insisted their religious beliefs—which the rest of us are under no obligation to follow—should override the communal need to protect children."
This is true of all the Christer cult sects.
ALL ABRAHAMIC CULTS!!!
That true for all world religions!
In theory, confession is supposed to be anonymous (although every Catholic kid who went to confession were aware that the priests knew who was on the other side of the screen), so it is also in theory that if someone confesses somthing that is a civil crime to a priest (be it sexual abuse, murder, theft or whatever) that a priest could report the act but not necessarily the identity of the person who confessed. Any parishoners who are feeling the full brunt of Catholic guilt (which is a really heavy burden) knows that Father Friendly is going to give them the stink eye the next time he sees them, so instead of going to Saint Myparish, they are going to drive across town to the church of Saint Egregious to confess the really juicy sins. For the Catholic church, this is a big nothingburger, but it's a way for the bishops to pretend this is still the middle ages when they could order the civil authorities around with impunity. People in the higher ranks of the church's heirocracy remember when they had that power and a lot of them regret that it ever slipped out of their clutches.
Priest: We all have these kinds of feeling from time to time. You know, there was a man on our church council a few years ago. A decent enough fellow but a bit abrasive. Oblivious to anyone else's feelings. I wanted to get him out of my hair. I used to fantasize about him converting to Judaism. One day, I said, "Frank, I think..."
Ray: Wait, a minute his name was Frank?
Priest: That's unimportant. The point-
Ray: No. Frank Barone?
Priest: You know Frank Barone?
Ray: He's my father.
Priest: Your parents are Frank and Marie Barone?
Ray: Yes.
Priest: You're absolved.
I've seen too many TV-dramatized instances of "anonymous" confessions ["Hello, Fred." "Hello, Father Aloysius. Bless me father..."] to ever believe that anonymity tripe.
When I was in middle school, I once saw a confession scene in a soap opera, where the confessional was actually a room with a couple of chairs and I think a small table (?). A priest sat in one chair, and people came in, sat down across from the good father and confessed their sins face-to-face. I remember that scene because the thought of being required to tell a grownup everything bad I had done that week freaked the daylights out of me.
Then later on, I saw TV shows and movies using the "anonymous" confession booth, so I eventually figured the soap opera writers weren't catholic and got it wrong.
They started the open face-to-face option when I was in elementary school. I never took it; I could at least pretend the priest didn't recognize my voice if I couldn't see his face.
That's why you go to a church across town or in the far 'burbs to confess the most damaging ones. On the other hand, since when is TV an accurate portrayal of life? In the confessional, the anonymity is supposed to be de jure even if not de facto.
However, even an informal (face-to-face) conversation involving a priest can invoke the seal of confession by using the magic words "…bless me father for I have sinned…”
"A Washington State law requires priests to report confessions of abuse. Catholic bishops and the DoJ call that religious persecution."
So, IOW, protecting children = religious persecution, and the predator-in-chief agrees. I hope parents are taking notice.
“Department of Justice” is now a sad misnomer.
DOI— department of injustice.
Depart𝘶𝘳𝘦 of Justice, more like.
predator protecting other predators. Shocking
Fox and henhouse.
Anyone seeking absolution of sin through the conduit of a mediator that has a monopoly on forgiveness through some religious conceit meanwhile excluding the agrieved is NOT seeking absolution, they are seeking to offload guilt while remaining whole. C'est-à-dire, it's not forgiveness, it's a dodge. To find true absolution, confess openly, confess to your god, confess to the law, confess to your victim. But don't try to hide behind anything.
If the church cannot get its holy head around this, the fundamental idea of confession and absolution was meaningless Day One.
"We're asking the court to step in and stop the state from turning a sanctuary for the soul into a tool of surveillance."
The soul that continues to choose evil does not deserve sanctuary unless they are ready to make a full confession to the proper authorities and face the penalty of their conduct.
Is a person who intends to not stop his active abuse of children truly repentant? No. Of course not. Why is this even a question? Someone who does not intend to surrender himself to the proper authorities to end their active harm to another is not in a proper place to receive forgiveness. What they want, and what the Church seems to want to provide them, is spiritual solace as they continue hurting innocent people.
"My son, if you want absolution, you must turn yourself in. I cannot give it otherwise."
THAT is what it would take. The question is whether or not the church has the balls to actually follow through on that.
If confession was so sacrosanct, we wouldn’t have centuries of priests using secrets from confession to blackmail political leaders. When it is used to promote the church’s interests it’s fine, but if it’s for protecting children or the vulnerable, it’s a sacrament.
Always the church, all the churches, plead persecution when they are expected to be held to the same standards as everyone else. When they lose a privilege they never should have had in the first place.
It is also clear that Catholicism has nothing to do with morality since they fight like dogs to avoid the right thing to do.
Things are secret and sacrosanct ONLY when the church benefits.
There is so much wrong with this whole argument, although not with hemant’s reporting of it.
As far as I know, there is nothing in the Bible about confession. There are a number of passages which indicate a proper course of action in cases of abuse. Something about millstones and causing a child to stumble. Something about no greater love than a man should lay down his life for his friends. Something about God so loving the world that he died for everyone’s sins.
One has to wonder exactly how many Catholics are confessing to their priests about their child molestation activities. But this inadvertently reveals the real problem: reporting abuse means that priest will be reporting on their fellow priests, not actively working to cover up the abuse, as has been done for centuries.